Councillor Habib M.L Ceesay New Jeshwang and Ebo-Town has been cautioned by the Local Government Commission of Inquiry for Giving False Information to their investigators.
Councillor Ceesay said he never know that giving false information to investigators of the commission was a crime.
He was cautioned by Lead Counsel Patrick Gomez that his act of giving false statement was culpable and he can be criminally charged by the police.
The witness told the investigators of the Commission which was rightly captured in his written statement that: “On the appointment of Nuru Deen Adama, Isatou Faal, Sanjally, Yusupha Sallah and Babucarr Jammeh, I can vividly remember these appointments were presented to Establishment and Appointment Committee in our first sitting by the Lord Mayor, Talib Ahmed Bensouda and there was no job advertisement conducted for these positions. I recalled that both Nuru Deen Adams and Isatou Faal were given grades that didn’t match their respective qualifications, which I challenged in our committee meetings. However, there was a general council resolution to appoint Isatou Faal on grade 10.1 and Nuru Deen Adams on 7.1.”
Appearing before the Commission on Tuesday, Councillor Habib M.L Ceesay, who doubles as the head of the Establishment and Appointment Committee of the KMC, admitted that he was the one who told the investigators and further admitted that the statement therein was his.
The controversy started when he began to make another statement to remove the the name of the Mayor. He was asked whether what he told the investigators was misrepresented and he responded by saying “These was what I told the investigators, but I want to change it.”
When asked why, he said the statement he made before the investigators was made without oath and now that he appeared before the Commission, he wants to remove the name of the Mayor.
Lead Counsel Patrick Gomez told him that it is a crime under the laws to make false statements to investigators of the Commission. Lead Counsel Gomez highlighted that the Councillor made false statement and admitted before the Commission that what he told the investigators was false. He made reference to what was contained in the statement and the testimony of the witness to argue that he made false statements.
The witness said he wished to change the statement to remove the name of the Mayor.
The exact statement the witness want to remove was: “These appointments were presented to the first meeting of the Establishment and Appointment Committee by the Lord Mayor.” He told the investigators that “he can vividly remember” that the Mayor was the one who brought the list to them during the first meeting of the Establishment and Appointment Committee. Appearing before the Commission, he said he cannot remember whether it was the mayor or not, and in that regard he wanted to remove the name of the Mayor. He mentioned that he made a “mistake” and wanted to change it.
“Why did you tell the investigators what you told them?” Lead Counsel Gomez asked the witness.
The witness said the reason was because he cannot remember even though his statement unequivocally stated that “I can vividly remember.”
“Are you aware that giving a false statement to a public officer is a crime?” Counsel Gomez asked.
“Not to my knowledge,” Councillor Ceesay replied.
Lead Counsel read section 114 of the Criminal Code, which creates the crime call “Giving False Information to a Public Servant.”
Lead Counsel Gomez said the witness did not dispute as he testified that he was the one who told the investigators what was written in the statement. contained in his statement. He stated that he was not under oath when making that statement.
Counsel Gomez said the witness can be criminally charged with perjury, because of his false statement. He stated that the witness could be charged with perjury and giving false information to a public servant. He laid down the basis of his claim making references from the written statement of the witness and his oral testimony before the Commission.
Lead Counsel Gomez said the matter should be referred to the police for charges to leveled against the witness – perjury and giving false information to a public servant.
Ceesay is a resident of New Jeshwang.
His written statement of 31 July 2023 and the additional statement dated 4 September 2024 were both tendered and admitted in evidence.
He was asked about the 2020 National Audit Report report about the KMC.
The witness said he was not informed about the audit finding against him and he did not see any audit report from the National Audit Office. He added that he could not remember participating in a general council meeting wherein they discussed issues of audit reports.
The witness claimed that he has been frequently calling on the management of the Council to review the audit reports to inform the general council of what is going on and what the audit findings are. He added that this was necessary to ensure the efficiency of the council. He was asked whether that was happening and he responded in the negative. When asked whether the management of the Council is effective, he answered in the negative.
The witness said he has been benefitting financially from the Council. He only mentioned one, which was during the time he was sick and the council made payment of D12,000 for his medical bill to do CT scanning.
Page 127 of the audit report indicated that the KMC made medical payments for people for both local and internal medical bills without having a medical scheme. The auditors said the KMC gave the witness D15,000 as impress for medical bill.
“Did you make request for impress?” Counsel Gomez asked.
“I cannot remember. Unless I make my findings,” the witness said.
The management response from the KMC did not deny the findings of the auditors.
“I can fully remember the D12,000 but for the D15,000, I cannot remember that. It is a long time. It is 5 to 6 years now,” the witness said.
He was asked to check from his records and that of the Council to provide evidence whether he had applied for impress and all the details around thoses impress. Lead Counsel Gomez asked the witness whether he has retired all the impress he was given and he requested time to find out.
The witness said he has a ward development committee comprising a male and female representative from each of 8 sub-wards in his area amounting to 16 people with other nominated representatives for youth, women, Christians and Muslims. He claimed that they used to hold meetings quarterly. He was asked to provide the meeting minutes of the ward development committee. He said he does not keep records. He requested time to consult someone in the committee, who he believed might keep their meeting minutes.
He was asked about the D260,000 he was paid by the KMC. The witness said there was a council resolution to give him and other councillors who participated in an exercise D260,000 each.
“What exercise was that?” Counsel Gomez asked.
He said he was part of an ad-hoc committee that was set up to go round to ensure that the revenue of the council is maximised. He added that they were out to ensure that the people pay their taxes. He testified that the exercise took 24 days.
“The councillors are there to observe to make sure the people are paying. They are not there to touch any money,” he said.
This means the councillors were only observers and they were paid each D260,000 for a 24 days exercise of going with revenue collectors to observe them do the collection. He stated that during the exercise they went to markets and businesses. He added that he was part of the team that went to Jeshwang Constituency covering the communities Old Jeshwang, New Jeshwang, Ebo-Town and some parts of Pipeline.
Lead Counsel Gomez asked the witness about the records of the exercise. The witness said he is not sure there was anyone taking minutes and there were no reports. He added that he attended all the days and participated in the whole exercise for 24 days. He testified that he did not know whether a report was prepared for the exercise. The witness said some of the councillors he can remember in that exercise included councillors Karamo Ceesay and Kemo Bojang. Lead Counsel Gomez told the witness that Karamo Ceesay authored a report. The witness said he did not see the report. He was handed the report and he read it. Lead Counsel Gomez told him that issue will be looked into in details when he appears again before the Commission.
In his written statement of the witness of 31 July 2023, the witness discussed the issue of appointment as a member of the Establishment Committee and the Chairperson of the said committee. On how appointment is done, the witness said the Establishment Committee would first receive a letter from the head of the department having the vacancy and then review it, then make recommendations and forward it to the general council. He added that that is the procedure they used to appoint people. He stated that under his leadership they developed a scheme of service.
On the appointment of people with less qualification, the witness said he cannot remember the appointment of anyone with less qualification. The witness was referred to his own statement. He testified that the appointment of Nuru Deen Adams and 4 others happened during their first meeting, when they were new in the council. He said they were not interviewed and they were referred them to the CEO to appoint them without scrutiny of their application.
The witness was ordered by Chairperson Jainaba Bah to bring the specific meeting minute in which they referred the matter to the CEO to appoint Isatou Faal, Nuru Deen Hydara, Baboucar Jammeh and 2 others. He was given the deadline of 24 October 2024 to provide the evidence.
“Where you aware that Nuru Deen Adams and Isatou Faal have a relationship with the Mayor?” Lead Counsel Gomez asked.
“At the time, I was not aware. I only hear it from hearsay,” the witness said.
The witness said after Isatou Faal’s appointment as the manager responsible for public affairs, his committee reviewed it and resolved that Isatou Faal was not qualified for the job. He testified that the general council set-aside the recommendation of the Establishment and Appointment Committee. He said his Committee’s power stops at making recommendation and need the approval of the general council for their recommendations to be enforced. He added that the general council is more powerful than his committee. The witness said he challenged the appointments and the grades they were being paid were higher grades that do not match their qualification. He stated that the general council dismissed his committee’s recommendation. He said the general council approved the grading for both Nourideen on 7.1 and Isatou Faal on 10.1.
“Do you think their appointments was correct?” Gomez asked.
“There appointments were not in line with the service rules,” the witness said.
The witness was asked about the extension of the contracts of Mustapha Kanyi and Adama Jammeh. He said he was not in support of those extensions.
“I did not support it. I think for us as the Council we supposed to move on. Hence, we understood a lot of things,” he said.
He said he strongly opposed the extension of the contract of Adama Jammeh, who said she is a sister to the mother of the mayor. Adama retired from active service after reaching the retirement age but she was appointed on contract 6 years as the head of the rates unit of the KMC. The witness said he requested the management to prepare a succession plan, but that fail. He added that he wanted young people to “grow.”
